Ben Cousins: Hot Potato

With Ben Cousins safely out of the country, it's now up to his manager Ricky Nixon to try to find Ben a new club for the 2008 season. But who'd have such a repeat offender in their midst? And will deals be done before the AFL Executive makes a ruling on a charge of "bringing the game into disrepute"? Join us in the game of Ben Cousins Hot Potato as we track the desperate bid to secure Cousins' playing career.

Ben Cousins, shown below heading to the airport with well-wishers, jetted out to complete his drug rehab (and a spot of firefighting!) in Malibu. We're all hoping the next attempt goes better than the first session. No doubt, the stylists, masseuses, hairdressers, pedicurists, manicurists, trainers, nutritionists, astrologists and other clinic staff will all be rooting for him too.

Cousins Leaves for Airport in Convoy ...


Before Re-enacting Cavity Search for Cameras

Perth's meth and coke markets reacted strongly to the news, with prices plummeting in response to the fall in aggregate demand. Analysts predict markets will rebound as a number of meth labs are reportedly closing up shop. However, they point to the absence of a surge in second-hand glassware on eBay, suggesting the drop in supply will be temporary. Clearly, many manufacturers and importers are expecting Cousins to return to form.

As a sign of just how badly Cousins' mental state has deteriorated, he declared he "absolutely" would play again in the AFL. He leaves the Herculean task of shopping him around to player-agent Ricky "Millhouse" Nixon, perhaps best known on this site for his management of Wayne Carey during the dark days of the infamous dunny-shag.

Nixon's now talking up the prospects of a deal with another club:

"It's not a matter of if, but when," Nixon said last night.

"And probably in Victoria."

...

"I read all these newspaper reports about clubs saying they do not want him. That's different in what they're saying to me," Nixon said. (Herald-Sun, 26/10/2007)

Meanwhile, the AFL Commission are meeting on the 19th and 20th of November to, in part, decide whether or not to charge Cousins' with "bringing the game into disrepute". This will seem him locked out. For good.

(In fairness to Ben, the incremental amount of "disrepute" he brought into the game is really quite modest. Dozens of players have been in court this past few years and nearly all the vices have been covered. Should he wish to mount this defence, his lawyers are welcome to use the menu on the right to browse through the litany of bashings, rapes, drug-abuse, traffic offences, sleaze and swindles.)

So Tricky Ricky's going to have to use all the tricks in his book to land this deal in the next 28 days. The clocks ticking, Ricky! Move over, Arliss. Get out of the way Jerry Maguire. Forget it, Trevor Heslop. And step off Ari Gold. Ricky Nixon is going to get this hot potato a contract!

There are only 16 AFL clubs in the league. Join us as we track in real-time the dwindling list of possibilities. If you hear of a club publicly ruling out Ben Cousins joining their list, drop us a comment (with source!).

Geelong.
Port Adelaide.
West Coast Eagles.
Kangaroos.
Hawthorn.
Collingwood.
Sydney.
Adelaide.
St Kilda.
Brisbane.
Fremantle.
Essendon.
Western Bulldogs.
Melbourne.
Carlton.
Richmond.

With plenty of clubs still to rule out having Cousins on their list, it should be an exciting few weeks. Is anyone - even RichmondFremantle - desperate enough to sign-up this talented but deeply flawed player for another couple of seasons? Stay tuned.

*** UPDATE ***
BLOODY HELL! Disgraced Ben Cousins has gone missing in LA. He never showed up to his rehab clinic, instead disappearing with "two blonde women" in a "Mercedez-Benz sports car" who picked him up at the airport.

Sources close to the Summit Centre in Malibu told The Australian yesterday the 29-year-old failed to check in, as scheduled, on Monday.

They say they are worried for his safety.

"No one has any idea where he is," said a person with knowledge of the situation.

"He's got everyone freaking out because LA's not a good place to be out doing what he may be doing.

"I just hope nothing bad happens to him." (The Australian, 1/11/2007)

Geez. Like Ricky Nixon didn't have a tough enough job shopping him around. Now he's AWOL, I hope any bidding clubs insist on COD.

I sincerely hope he's not waving a bunch of cash around the mean streets of Los Angeles trying to score meth. That city will eat him alive. I've watched Cops and it's no picnic.

Here's hoping the whole thing is a stunt to throw the media off his scent. Or win public sympathy. Hell, even if he turns up tomorrow covered in hickies, genital warts and pubic lice it would be a better outcome.

*** UPDATE ***
Well, Ben Cousins has cranked out another episode in his ongoing saga. It turns out he wasn't wandering the streets of LA trying to score meth after all. His father, Bryan Cousins, put out a media release stating that Cousins' is not loose or missing but in secret rehab.

He has since been charged with "bringing the game into disrepute" and fronts up to a hearing at the AFL Commission on the 19th of November. This makes poor old Ricky Nixon's job a lot harder.

Now, Cousins is back from the US and undertaking more secret rehab in Sydney. Let's hope "secret rehab" doesn't involve the use of glass pipes, white powders and naked women.

Citations: Herald-Sun, 26/10/2007; The Australian, 1/11/2007

Word Count: 1002

Tags: footy, swindle

Footy Finances Exposed

Getting a handle on the complex financial dealings of the AFL is challenging. Footy is now a huge business involving massive salaries, mind-boggling media deals and alarming commercial transactions. Drawing on a number of public sources, this week we attempt to distill the financial essence of the game in a format even footy fans can understand.

After our research team spent hours poring over various AFL financial reports, individual club statements and a wealth of independent media analyses, we concluded that AFL's business is extremely complex. Money flows in from:

• media businesses ($200M p.a.) for the right to broadcast games,
• government subsidies ($55M p.a.) for being real Aussies, Update: Real figure is closer to $33M for 06/07 financial year. It may vary from year to year.
  
• gambling businesses ($10M p.a.) for, well, we can't figure it out,
• sponsorships,
• ticket sales,
• club memberships,
• catering.

This last one is particularly controversial, after Telstra Dome's boss Ian Collins conceded that the half-time pass-out ban was, in part, about protecting caterers' revenue (and hence licensing revenue for the game) on the extraordinarily expensive food on offer.

Rather than try to provide a detailed breakdown of this knotted ball of entwined dealings, we've prepared a chart that picks two ends of the thread and pulls:


So, meat pies cost something like $7 at the footy venues. Cocaine costs around $250 per gram on the street (according to the Australian Institute of Criminology). No one is suggesting that the bulk of the cocaine and other illicit drugs consumed by footballers comes from pie sales. Despite the large number of pies sold each year - plus the gobsmacking mark-ups - most of the AFL revenue comes from media and sponsorship deals. This illustrates just how important it is to the AFL that we sit on our couches and watch ads interspersed with footy.

On the other side of the equation, how much of the AFL's outgoings end up being spent on drugs? As expected the AFL Annual Report (2006) didn't include a breakout for this item. It did indicate that some $133M was spent last year on around 640 players, and average salaries were around $220K. Player income is more than 60% of the AFL's expenses.

It is, of course, extremely difficult to get a robust estimate of the proportion of income the average footballer spends on illicit drugs. As it happens, our researchers could only dig up one data point published by an organisation shielded by defamation lawyers:

It is said that [Ben] Cousins was spending about $3000 a week on drugs from his annual salary of $800,000. (Herald-Sun, 25/3/2007)

In before-tax terms, if the Murdoch press is to be believed, this particular player is allegedly spending $156K per year, out of $800K, yielding a soft estimate of around 20%. Is this likely to be high or low?

On the one hand, this is likely to be too high. Cousins, after all, is in continuing rehabilitation, apparently for his raging ice addiction. As such, he may be spending a disproportionately large amount of his income on drugs.

On the other hand, it may be an underestimate. Cousins is a highly paid AFL footballer - probably in the top 5% of earners - so as a percentage his habit is probably small. Also, his preferred drug is allegedly crystal methamphetamine, typically half the price of cocaine. And let's not forget that while dozens of other players have tested positive for using drugs, Cousins escaped detection. Can we presume, therefore, that Cousins wasn't using drugs at the highest rate? (There are other - more sinister - reasons why some players avoid detection and others don't.) So considering these countervailing arguments, maybe 20% isn't too far off the mark.

Naturally, not all footballers are regular users. It's hard to get a feel for the proportion that are - certainly the AFL drug testing regime is thoroughly discredited and of no help at all. Dale Lewis famously suggested that it was about 75% (before being dismissed and attacked by AFL officials). Lawrence Angwin suggested "five out of the nine in the leadership group" were out on pills the night before he got canned. John Worsfold claimed that eight Eagles admitted to drug use (out of 40 in the squad, that's 20%). Let's split the difference and call it 50%.

If the 20% of income guesstimate is applied across the 50% of user-players, then in ball-park terms, we're talking about 10% of $133M. This is something like $10M per year flowing into the coffers of drug dealers from AFL footballers.

That's a disturbingly large figure. If anyone's got a better estimate for either the proportion of income spent on drugs or the proportion of footballers who regularly use drugs, please run it past a defamation lawyer, get it published and then send us the link. We'll be glad to update this estimate in light of new information.

Ten million bucks a year on drugs? That's a lot of overpriced pies.

*** UPDATE ***
More insight into how the AFL makes its rivers of cash came to light in the past week. It's not all selling overpriced pies - there's many lines of business to exploit, and once again, the AFL isn't shy about taking people to court when it feels its million-dollar interests are threatened.

The AFL is claiming that discount clothing retailer Dimmeys and Forges (famous for its use of tax-dodging former footballer Dipper) is violating the AFL's "intellectual property" (groan) by selling "knock-off" (their words, not mine) shirts in club colours:


A $20 shirt from Dimmeys.
Source: The Age


The equivalent, properly licensed shirt costs around $75. So, want to support your club? Pay a $50 premium to the retailer, who then kicks some back to the AFL, who dole a bit out the club, which then trickles down to the players' salaries, so a portion of that can end up with purveyors of Australia's finest imported cocaine.

Dimmeys, champion of the underdog and the Western suburbs in general, has vowed to fight the case. As Dimmey's Ken Hampson said "The AFL owns trademarks but it doesn't own every bird that exists in Australia. It doesn't own every magpie." Oh Ken. So naive. How much you have to learn about how the AFL does business.

Remember when grannies used to knit scarves in their team colours? Or kids would show up with their faces painted? Once, that was a symbol of belonging. Now it's just forgone revenue and someone has to pay. Do you think the AFL is happy seeing adjacent red, white and black stripes on a little kid's shirt without the $50 AFL imprimatur on it? That's one less player on a seven figure contract. Someone call Amnesty International!

Once the greedy AFL licensing behemoth gets up a head of steam, you can forget about getting within 100m of the 'G in unsanctioned face paint, yet alone wearing an illegal backyard scarf that literally sucks the lifeforce from our struggling clubs. This is the message they will be getting out: "Club spirit? No thanks, we'll just take the cash!"

Does anyone else sometimes wonder if the long-term interests of the game aren't being jeopardised by the short-term needs of administrators forced to justify their own million-dollar salaries?

Citations: Herald-Sun, 25/3/2007

Word Count: 844

Tags: footy, drugs, swindle

Spread Your Bets - Footballers Caught Out

It's all so ... tawdry. A betting scandal has engulfed the ranks of the Australian Football League, with four players being named for wagering on matches. While the details are slowly emerging, a carefully choreographed piece of theatre unfolds to ensure damage is contained.

First announced five weeks ago, the AFL has been investigating the use of betting accounts in the players' own names with Betfair and Tabcorp. It's expected the inquiry - headed by AFL investigators Allan Roberts and Bill Kneebone - will expand to include other betting agencies, taking two weeks to conclude.

As pointed out by various bookies, the players can easily use the accounts of their friends and families. The fact that they overlooked this basic precaution speaks volumes of the players' stupidity, arrogance and confidence in getting away with it. Further, it suggests that a larger group of players who did have the nous to hide their dodgy wagering behind false names remain undetected.

For the record, here are the greedy idiots named so far:

Adelaide Crows midfielder Simon Goodwin, Melbourne's Daniel Ward, Swans youngster Keiren Jack and Kangaroos ruckman David Hale have been named as the four players being investigated by the AFL for betting on senior matches in the 2006 season. (ABC Online, 17/2/2007)

(Regulars might remember Simon Goodwin as the mulitple-award winning footballer who assaulted a photographer and made threats to kill after being photographed wild-eyed and out of control at 11am. Don't worry though, this won't affect his leadership potential.)

The problem with footballers punting on footy matches is obvious. Equally clear is the temptation: like bourbon and coke, jet skis and bleached blonde grid girls, gambling is one of the great bogan indulgences. Giving way too much cash to bored and listless footballers while expecting them not to wager is foolhardy in the extreme.

Hence, the AFL has a very clear policy on gambling, which it rams home with a blistering series of player seminars, online statements, monitoring of wagering activities, various kinds of "tut-tut" noises and legally-binding contracts. All of which counts for nowt. (Makes you wonder about the kind of traction other policies - like those around drug abuse, racism and misogyny - are getting with players.)

There is a Gambling Workshop at the induction camp for the newly drafted players and players are warned at annual visits to clubs by AFLPA staff.

The AFL players code of conduct states footballers are prohibited from betting "on any aspect of an AFL match".

"The AFL regulations also prohibit the passing on of information that is not publicly available concerning teams playing in any match (including the actual or likely composition of the team, players injuries, the form of players and tactics) unless given in a bona fide media interview," it states. (News.com.au, 17/2/07)

Interestingly, under this policy, players are not allowed to participate in the AFL Misbehaviour Market (betting on AFL player court appearances), since this would entail informing on "the actual or likely composition of the team". Even though the criminal justice systems conspires to ensure that players are never ever inconvenienced, there's still a chance one will slip through the net and actually miss a game because of the latest bashing, rape, drink-driving, domestic violence etc incident.

This is, of course, publicity the AFL doesn't want. It has deals with the betting companies to get a slice of the wagering action. (Why? Surely the results of a footy match are public information? If you want proof-positive of the immense power wielded by footy officials in the country, just contemplate how they manage to screw hard-headed businesses into handing over money for free.) Naturally, the AFL doesn't want anything to jeopardise the flow of cash into their coffers. This is behind The Tisers speculation that "it is believed the AFL wanted the issue hushed up until they were in a position to announce the players' penalties, believed to be hefty fines." (The Adelaide Advertiser, 17/2/07).

There's also the mystery as to why the clubs came out and named their players so quickly once the story broke that "unnamed players" were punting. (Compare and contrast with the handling of drug abuser identities - which is actually a criminal matter as well as a violation of the toothless AFL Code of Conduct.) One theory is that a story about "unnamed players" at certain clubs would lead to speculation (and evidence!) flowing out in an uncontrolled fashion. You know, people phoning up the talk-back radio saying "I saw such-and-such at the TAB", nasty rumours published on footy hate-blogs. That kind of thing. No, better to put a firebreak around the issue, hang a couple of the more stupid players out to dry and let the rest slink off quietly.

More of footy's dirty secrets escape. More evidence of the lawless, arrogant and "special" nature of Aussie Rules' elite. More undermining of the League's ability to control its players. More spin, managed information release and big-money machinations from the chiefs. More reason to hold the entire AFL in contempt and disgust.

*** UPDATE ***
The players in question seem to have avoided any suspension or serious penalty at all. In fact, the only things suspended were half the value of the fines:

The league handed down fines of $55,000 to three players who bet on AFL matches, while a fourth received a reprimand.

Adelaide star Simon Goodwin received the harshest penalty, slugged $40,000, although half was suspended pending any future breach of the AFL's gambling laws.

...

But the AFL's bark could lack any investigative bite, with football operations manager Adrian Anderson admitting the league only has access to betting information from two companies - Tabcorp and Betfair.

...

Adelaide said Goodwin would remain in the club's leadership group and not be punished further.

...

While there were no bans this time, Anderson said any player caught from now on would be suspended, or in the most extreme case banned from playing AFL. (SMH, 1/3/2007)

So they nearly got it right: full fines plus suspensions from play plus demotion for those in "leadership" positions. The message seems to be that they'll get it right next time. Maybe. I have my doubts. Perhaps the message sent is "Guys, we don't want the grief and bad press so make sure you place bets through a friend at one of the dozens of other betting outlets." This betting is probably unstoppable: Cashed up bogans like a punt and footballers will not be told what to do.

Citations: ABC Online, 17/2/2007; News.com.au, 17/2/07; The Adelaide Advertiser, 17/2/07; SMH, 1/3/2007

Word Count: 1122

Tags: footy, swindle, gambling, scandals

Footballers Dodge Tax

It should come as no surprise to hear that our massively wealthy footballers are dodging their tax obligations. It fits their profile as super-rich, spoilt and immature young men lacking in social conscience. What is surprising is the scale, with around 40 players under scrutiny. At least the Australian Taxation Office is neither intimidated nor awe-struck and so is able to mount a credible investigation into the rorting.

With annual incomes of up to a million dollars a year (averaging around $200K), Australian Rules footballers are amongst the most highly-paid members of our community. They are also, in a sense, emotionally-retarded, with leading psychologists describing them as possessing an "exaggerated sense of entitlement and diminished sense of responsibility and empathy". It's to be expected that many will seek to hoard their absurd wealth to the detriment of the rest of the community.

Just a couple of years ago, players were under scrutiny for employing mechanisms like side payments, front companies and payments to spouses for the purposes of getting around the salary cap. These cosy arrangement also had the neat side-effect of hiding income from the taxman. Even earlier, as AFL player salaries really started to take off, the Tax Office launched an inquiry into their affairs, especially relating to dodgy work deductions. This ultimately lead to a handy guide for clubs to manage player tax affairs.

Now, the concerns are around the failure to supply tax returns relating to personal income and business initiatives, and their rights to deduct agent fees (soon to be contested in court). According to Tax office deputy commissioner Shane Reardon:

"There's no doubt about that (prosecution), if you have a look at the number of prosecutions we have already done of all individual taxpayers.

"We offer them the opportunity to comply, but we will escalate through to prosecution."

Tax dodgers face fines of up to $5500, plus a year's jail, if they ignore lodging their returns by a court-imposed date.

Convictions are normally recorded for the charges and fines of up to $2200 for the first offence.

...

The Players' Association said a conviction would not stop a player from taking to the field. (The Herald Sun, 4/4/05)

I hope the penalties ramp up a little - the conviction won't stop footballers playing, and the fine is roughly what they make in a week!

More insidious is the realisation that very few footballers have the financial nous to structure their tax affairs. Hell, given their low standards of education I doubt that many of them could use BPay to pay a phone bill! (For example, Campbell Brown's efforts to operate an ATM saw him end up in court.) So who's helping these greedy but dim-witted players design and implement their tax dodges?

Still, we can take some solace in knowing that it's the Canberra-based ATO heading up the inquiry; frankly, I don't trust the Victorian Police to investigate claims against footballers. (More disturbingly, it seems our top detective is also skeptical.)

It's unlikely that players will come around to the realisation that paying taxes is the price of civilisation. Let's face it: very few would have benefited from universities, museums, welfare, the ABC and public health, whereas the legal system is a constant thorn in their side. Instead, we'll have to trust in continued media and regulator scrutiny of their huge incomes.

*** Update ***
In addition to Dipper getting pinged for tax offences, former player (now one of those "self-indulgent" commentators on Fox Footy's ironically-named Winners program) Matthew Campbell has also been caught out dodging his obligations.

The Age Diary (17/8/2006) is reporting that Campbell was taken to court for failing to lodge four tax returns. "He was convicted, fined $300 on each charge and ordered to pay $139 costs." That's a good start from the Tax Office, but I hope they go after current players on million dollar contracts, not just washed-up ex-footballers on the bones of their bum.

Citations: The Herald Sun, 4/4/05

Word Count: 681

Tags: footy, spoilt_rotten, court, swindle

Courts Clogged By AFL Footballers

Melbourne Magistrates Courts (AFL Division) risks being swamped by widespread lawlessness from current and former AFL players. The backlog stems from a spate of criminality that shows no sign of abating. It's not yet clear if current facilities will be able to accommodate the surge in demand for court services, or whether the Victorian Government will need to examine options for upgrading capacity for processing Aussie Rules footballers.

The latest footballer to take up precious time in our courts is David Dench, captain of North Melbourne's 1977 premiership team. He has been charged with conspiracy to defraud, theft, obtaining property by deception and furnishing false information. These charges stem from a massive (alleged) fraud involving maintenance contracts with a local university:

The elaborate conspiracy involved Victoria University being invoiced for millions of dollars for work that was not done.

Police allege that Mr Dench's maintenance company invoiced the university for $4.7 million of maintenance work which was not done.

They allege the fraud involved more than $10 million between 1996 and 2001. (The Australian, 6/2/06)

This comes hot on the heals of former Collingwood player Peter Grahame Hall's massive con (at least $600,000 worth). Not only should you question whether or not to lend money to AFL players - you might want to rethink going into business with them too.

The next miscreant to front the courts will be Carlton's Heath Scotland. He's been charged with recklessly causing injury in "an incident" in May 2005. The Age believes this incident occurred in a bar. It's not known at this time if this was the Ivanhoe Hotel where, a couple of months later, Heath Scotland (along with teammates Lance Whitnall and Nick Stevens) was present during the abduction and torture of his "associate" Brendan Schievella by suspected underworld figures.

This comes on top of last week's court appearances by Melbourne's Colin Sylvia for allegedly kicking his girlfriend and Hawthorn's Campbell Brown for taking on a cash machine in a 7-Eleven. We're still awaiting the County Court's judgment from the guilty pleas by Kade Carey, Dane Swan and Aaron Ramsay for the bizarre and inexplicable Federation Square rampage and gang bashing.

With all this activity, the Melbourne Magistrates Courts (AFL Division) may have to look into upgrading its facilities. Any talk of a public-private partnership (much loved by the Brumby state government) with the AFL Tribunal should stay that way: just talk. It's hard to see how the cause of justice could be advanced by having the AFL's own pseudo-judiciary passing judgment on its prized investments. It would be like having a dog breeders guild determining whether or not their million dollar stud pooches should be destroyed for biting people.

A fairer and more practical suggestion would be for courts to use fines that reflect the millionaire status of many footballers. To really speed things up, the Parliament could look at reversing the presumption of innocence in cases involving footballers. That, and the sensible use of cattle runs, holding pens and corrals should really get things moving through the courts.

Given that AFL footballer crime is only going to increase, this problem isn't going away. What other suggestions are there for the smooth administration of criminal justice for our footy players?

*** UPDATE ***
More light has been shed on the mysterious investigation into Heath Scotland. Yesterday he appeared in the AFL Division of the Melbourne Magistrates Court. It's alleged he slapped a girl in the face after arguing with her in the ladies' toilets at Crown Casino. Ironically, the club was called The Next Blue - referring perhaps to the Carlton player or his penchant for arguing in the dunnies?

Rumours have been circulating that Heath was sporting an oversized fur coat, matched with a large felt hat (with a feather in it) and a bejeweled ornate cane at the time of the incident. These rumours are almost certainly false and we should point out there are many reasons why a man would slap a woman while arguing in the toilets. Sadly for Heath, none of them are good.

*** UPDATE ***
Good ol' Heath. Turns out the lady in question wants an apology for copping a back-hander from him. He's boxing clever, hoping to make an apology part of a "diversion" (whereby he has to do community service or some other cop out).

Outside court, when [Scotland's lawyer] Mr Balmer was asked if Scotland was prepared to apologise, he said: "Maybe, it depends on whether it is a matter appropriate for diversion.

"It's still got to be considered and accepted and its not cast in stone yet," he said. (News.com, 3/07/2006)

What a champion - no apology unless he has a written guarantee to get away with the assault, well, "Scot" free. You sure are one legendary human being, Scottie!

*** UPDATE ***
Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul Smith bowed to the inevitable yesterday, and let Heath Scotland off. At the urging of the police, Heath's in a "diversionary program" now, whereby he pays a fine (less than a week's wages) and provides a written apology. No community service, no jail time and - get this - no conviction. Why? Because he wants to be a fireman when he grows up, and an assault conviction would jeopardise that.

Isn't the point of a criminal records check to exclude angry women-beaters from jobs where their lack of self-control threatens the wider community? Doesn't this decision undermine that very function? Still, he'll stand out somewhat with his fur-lined fireman's jackets, feather in his helmet and garish jewel-encrusted axe:

The court previously heard the woman met Scotland in the toilets before an altercation broke out. Police allege Scotland flicked his drink at her and that when she attempted to push him away, he struck the right side of her face with an open hand. (The Age, 19/9/2006)

Maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe Heath was enraged by her blatant violation of the fire code and, thinking quickly, he was merely dousing her cigarette? Who knows what kinds of tortured reasoning our justice system comes up with to ensure these men aren't unduly hindered in their activities.

Citations: The Australian, 6/2/06; News.com, 3/07/2006; The Age, 19/9/2006

Word Count: 1068

Tags: footy, court, bashing, underworld, swindle

More Footy Player Convictions

Nothing really scandalous, just everyday exceptionalism and contempt for society from Collingwood's Brodie Holland (hoon) and former player Peter Hall (con artist).

In the first incident, feted dancer (and eye candy man) Brodie Holland got a rap over the knuckles by a beak for driving his BMW coupe onto tram tracks in Swanston Street. Hardly the biggest crime in the world, but still one that smacks of arrogance: road rules are for other people. People who don't play footy. People who aren't on the telly. People who don't have, err, niche appeal:

Brodie Holland - Product of a Well-Oiled Publicity Machine
Source: www.MostBeautifulMan.com


But what really belies this man's attitude to driving is that he doesn't think he should be licensed. His outlandish claim that he believed his Western Australian licence was sufficient to drive in Victoria is seriously undermined by the fact that he had allowed this to lapse. After all, he was traded to Collingwood in 2000 - yet he was only picked up for unlicensed driving in 2005! Seems the cops who picked him up must have been new, otherwise they'd know to leave alone yet another footy hero swanning past in a sports car. (Cops and footy players enjoy a special relationship in this town.)

Of course, our criminal justice system ensured Brodie wasn't too inconvenienced:

[Magistrate] Sargent said Holland was beginning to "accumulate somewhat of a driving record" and urged him to be more careful. He fined Holland $500 and ordered him to pay costs of $60. (The Sydney Morning Herald, 13/1/06)

At first blush, one might think he should have his licence taken off him - but of course he (ingeniously) doesn't have one. A period of not being allowed a licence might seem like a good idea too - except that the police's detection powers seem a bit weak in this particular case. Also, Brodie (allegedly) has a propensity for violence at taxi ranks - allegedly striking a woman at one late last year. Perhaps we're all safer with him behind the wheel, despite his dubious "driving record". No doubt Victoria Police are relieved: it's one thing ferrying Sav Rocca around on a part-time basis, but another thing to chauffeur Brodie Holland between photo shoots for three months. (Hmmm, perhaps that explains why Brodie was driving around undetected all those years?)

The second incident - involving a jail term - is far more serious. Former Collingwood player Peter Grahame Hall (from the VFL days) conned friends out of almost $600,000, and will go to jail for at least three years for his crimes.

Judge Peter Gebhardt said Hall had repaid more than $267,000 but had not accounted for about $300,000.

"You dudded your friends and I have not been able to detect much remorse for this," the judge told him.

"You wanted to be a high flyer but didn't have the wings."

He said Hall had brought "painful havoc" on trusting friends. He was the godfather of a daughter of one of his victims. (Herald-Sun, 17/1/06)

The obvious - but difficult - lesson here is to not lend money to football players. There is a number of reasons why footballers make for bad debtors:

1. Reduced Future Earnings. A lack of education hampers their ability to earn money after their career is over.


2. Easy Money. People who have buckets of free cash just fall into their lap often don't appreciate its value, or how hard it is to earn money outside of footy. This makes them insensitive to the losses experienced by others, and over-confident in their ability to repay.


3. Bad Attitude. Don't take my word for it, respected university research psychologists warn of AFL footballers' "development of an exaggerated sense of entitlement and a diminished sense of responsibility and empathy." Sound like a good prospect for a loan?


4. Exposure to Risk. With AFL footballers, there's always the risk of something going wrong and the cops finding out. Drugs, rapes, gambling, bashings, underworld connections - a fawning public and institutional corruption can't protect them from their murky pasts indefinitely. If you've lent a footballer money the day before the rape squad knocks on his door or a drug dealer rolls over, you can bet your cash will be tied up with his lawyers for years to come. And, somewhat ironically, your cash injection will most likely have contributed to the trouble in the first place!

So, please, if you know what's good for you, do not get involved in (current or former) AFL players and business. It will only end in tears.

*** UPDATE ***
Brodie Holland's court hearing for the taxi rank assault case was scheduled back in March to occur - conveniently for him, I might add - for the first Monday after the Grand Final. (NB: Does this make the magistrate an optimistic Collingwood fan?) However, the October 2nd start date has been pushed back again:

BRODIE Holland and fiancee Sarita Stella will have to wait until March to find out if they will be convicted of assault charges.
The case between the two and a mystery woman over a late-night scuffle over a taxi was supposed to be finalised on October 2, but was adjourned to at least March after a problem with a witness.

Holland and Stella were charged with various assault-related counts after an incident on December 4 last year.

Holland and Stella have protested their innocence. (The Herald-Sun, 29/10/2006)

I guess the old saw that "justice delayed is justice denied" doesn't apply to footballers and their girlfriends. Or - and here's a disturbing thought - perhaps Sarita Stella has used her legal status as an ambassador to invoke diplomatic immunity? Does the Moonee Valley Racing Club ambassador have that kind of power? I thought I'd drop a note to the PR flacks:

I'm writing for The AFL Player Spectator, and we're doing a follow-up on the Brodie Holland and Sarita Stella assault case.

We note that News Corp are reporting that the case has been pushed back to March for reasons unknown. One line we're chasing up is that Sarita, as an ambassador for the Moonee Valley Racing Club, might have diplomatic immunity. As her fiancee, would that extend to Brodie too? Is the immunity only valid until the end of the Spring Racing Carnival?

We'd really appreciate it if you could please provide a quote on that.

Within ten minutes, The Speccy was visited by someone from vrc.ozracing.net.au. Twenty minutes later, we got this response:

Thanks for you enquiry. This matter has neither relevance to, nor impact on, Sarita Stella’s role as an ambassador for the Moonee Valley Racing Club.

As for a quote on the court case or diplomatic immunity, the most relevant source would be Sarita’s legal representatives.

If the VRC - as the legally-constituted granting authority - is not able to confirm her diplomatic immunity then it seems unlikely to me that her lawyers would claim it in her defence. Perhaps it's just a coincidence that the assault hearing has been pushed back - yet again - so as not to interfere with the important commercial engagements of one the defendants.

Citations: The Sydney Morning Herald, 13/1/06; Herald-Sun, 17/1/06; The Herald-Sun, 29/10/2006

Word Count: 1243

Tags: footy, court, swindle, bashing

Aussie Rules or Rafferty's Rules?

I believe it was William S. Burroughs who counseled against dealing with a religious man, on the grounds that he owes you nothing and is convinced he answers to a higher authority. Well, in this town, football is religion.

So similar warnings apply to the intellectual munchkins at the AFL, who show absolutely no capacity to be bound by honour, answering to the higher calling of making fistfuls of cash. In fact, they can ride roughshod over the most basic tenets of natural justice and decency without flinching.

The first example is that of Barry Hall, a key player for some team or other. This huge strapping thug-for-hire punched an opposition player in the stomach as he ran past him. Of course, he was subjected to the pseudo-judicial procedures of the AFL. As he was clearly guilty - caught on tape and with about three million witnesses - he received a one match suspension, in line with other rulings.

Barry's Playful Nudge
Source: Herald Sun

At this point, a crowd of football fans assembled at AFL HQ brandishing pitchforks and flaming torches, led by the usual media hacks, failed players and armchair biff-artists. Bizarrely, the Sydney Catholic Archbishop George Pell got swept up in the furor and offered the suggestion that it was "a playful little nudge"! It's Catholic moral leadership like that that kicked off so many pogroms, witch hunts, inquisitions and crusades. (We're also entitled to question whether a man whose appalling judgment about acts of violence could be trusted to not down-play kiddy fiddlers within his own organisation.)

The AFL Tribunal, unable to stand up to such pressure, quickly capitulated and let Barry Hall play at the Grand Final. Their rationale? When Barry punched the other bloke it was actually "in play" rather than "behind play". Even a five year-old child could point out the ethical bankruptcy in that line of reasoning. Not to mention the idea that a player should get off because missing the Grand Final would be a shame. Still, this is not an isolated incident: the AFL Tribunal let Travis Gaspar off for elbowing a guy in the face before the ball was even bounced!

Still, what should we care? If they want to cage over the Telstra Dome and have Thunderdome-style rules - two teams enter, one team leaves - then that's their prerogative, right? Unfortunately, it's not that simple. What happens on the ground doesn't stay there. An "anything goes" policy gees the boys up and increase the overall levels of violence off the field too. But also, these thugs are pin-ups and heroes to hundreds of thousands of boys and young men. And when they see them assaulting their opponents - and having that condoned by the tribal elders and judiciary - then it legitimises violence for all. And the rest of us have to walk the streets with kids who think that going the biff is okay.

Of course, the AFL Tribunal's cowed performance and willingness to roll-over is even more disturbing when you consider the AFL's proposal to have its judicial authority extended to include rape cases. Imagine if a crowd gathered out the front during such a hearing, shouting "Let him go - the bitch deserved it" or "There was only three of them - she's had worse" and similar. Horrifying.

The next case of the AFL disregarding the rules when it suits it is the question over who will sing the National Anthem at the Grand Final this year. The AFL had contracted acclaimed singer Ms Silvie Paladino for the gig.


Seasoned Board-Treader Ms Sylvie Paladino
Source: Bandshop

Fair enough. But then, the AFL shamelessly welched on the deal on the grounds that Brittney Spears impersonator Delta Goodrem might be able to make it. Possibly. Although, why this hadn't occurred to anyone at the AFL or Delta's camp months ago is a mystery. Ironically, Delta will use the occasion to push her latest saccharine offering (A Little Too Late):


Ex-Neighbours Starlet Delta What's-Her-Face
Source: Delta's Marketing Machine.

Of course, Sylvie is entitled to be upset at the shitty behaviour of the AFL:

I'm very disappointed to say the least," Paladino said. "I'm angry, very angry the AFL weren't honest from the beginning. I don't have any grudges towards Delta, but you don't contract another artist and then bump her at the last minute. It's absolutely disrespectful." Her manager, Mark Gogoll, said the AFL had acted "unprofessionally" ... (The Age, 22/9/2005)

Hear, hear. The AFL - and, I suspect, Delta's management team - should hang their heads in shame.

But, of course, this is football, so the normal rules don't apply. Whether it be commerce or justice, the AFL just is not bound by decency and will do whatever it can get away with. Anyone entering into agreements with the AFL should keep this in mind - if the can, they'll rob you blind.

Word Count: 840

Tags: footy, court, bashing, swindle

Would You Rent to a Footballer?

Is January too early to begin a blog of footballers' shortcomings? Not on your Nelson. Speccy poster-child Karl Norman has shown the way with this year's first "bad tenant" story. Here is the reportage from Melbourne's trashy Murdoch paper, known locally as The Hun:

TROUBLED AFL footballer Karl Norman has been accused of trashing a home, refusing to pay rent and leaving his landlord thousands of dollars out of pocket.

Norman, who is on $80,000 a year at Carlton, was kicked out of his Maribyrnong home for failing to pay more than $700 rent.

The house was left with smashed windows, damaged plaster, discarded condoms and cigarette burns in its carpet and on window sills.

Landlord Lisa Quinsee said she also found 20 bags of rubbish in her back yard and a club bag full of alcohol when she arrived to clean up her property after Norman and a housemate were evicted.

Yep, not content with earning more money than a high school principal, this 21 year-old burgeoning millionaire owes $700 on back rent and appears to be unable to meet the most basic requirements of holding a lease.

"I took him on as a Carlton footballer. I took him on as a professional footballer," Ms Quinsee said. She said she was shocked at the state of the house, claiming cigarettes had been butted out on the carpet and window sills and the toilet was clogged with newspapers. There were three broken windows, plaster damage in two rooms and abandoned bags of garbage contained decaying food including putrid prawn heads. (Herald Sun, 15/1/05)

While clearly this kind of disrespect is not how civilised people behave, one must suspect the landlady here: why did she take him on in knowing that this prospective tenant was a professional footballer! That should send alarm bells ringing in any owner's head.

When wealth has been handed to you on a plate and the only thing that matters is your team, it's not surprising that there is no respect for other people or their property.

Still, I expect Karl Norman will be first in line for one of (former AFL player) Fraser Brown's flats in Mitcham - if he ever gets them up.

Citations: Herald Sun, 15/1/05

Word Count: 383

Tags: footy, spoilt_rotten, swindle